Oh, Psystar. Fresh from the court's
smackdown of its antitrust claims against Apple, the wannabe Mac cloner has amended its lawsuit to ditch that argument and instead allege that Steve-o is committing the sin of copyright abuse by not letting it sell OS X compatible machines. Yes, copyright abuse. The little-known doctrine is generally used by by those being sued for copyright infringement as a defense, and Psystar's now
questionably hotshot legal team is essentially throwing a Hail Mary by arguing that Apple's EULA is anticompetitive because it relies on the power of copyright law to restrict the use of OS X to Apple's machines. If you're thinking to yourself, "But imposing conditions on a licensee is exactly the sort of power granted to a copyright owner!" congratulations -- you have incredibly boring thoughts. You're also exactly correct -- we don't see this argument getting any farther than the antitrust one did. Honestly, at this point we're pretty certain Psystar is hurting the OSx86 movement way more than it's helping -- Apple's
started making noise like it's coming after the hackers who make it possible, and that's the last thing we want to have happen. Maybe stop tickling the dragon, guys?
P.S.- The
PDF of the new counterclaim is an entertaining read -- the law students out there might want to read it as reassurance they'll eventually be paid the big bucks to spew out some deep crazy.
posted December 10th 2008 4:03PM
Such love and hate... I don't understand why people say Mac is a PC when apple itself says its not(bunch of stupid commercials showing flaws of others rather than nice things it can do). I own a macbook and it has served me well for almost 2 years. It has a bluetooth problem that happened a month after warranty ended so i'm stuck with it but other than that its great. I think Pystar has no way of winning but apple just can't keep getting bad publicity over this. Between this and we can't get virus crap, they are just asking for black hats to come up with ways to break apple's security through obscurity. oh well...live and learn i guess.
people dont say Macs are PCs, thats why they're, um, Macs
If your mac isn't a Personal Computer, then, what exactly is it? :S
It's pretentious. E.g. I don't drive a CAR, I drive a BMW.
Who needs more security holes/problems in macs OS and related software or products when quite a few security holes are already available. Such as those that were found in quicktime, safari, itunes, etc. Apple consistently bashes any other OS especially Windows even though Apples OS has more bugs/patches per release of the OS then Windows. Obviously the average person would not know this and just believe the crap that Apple spews out on a daily basis.
As far as Apple's EULA on there OS, dreamscape86 already stated what they needs to do: which is Psystar needs to do is prove that the restriction to what you do after you purchase the product should be removed and is not legal. As others have already stated any other company that has/would do this would be sued many times over.
Guys, you are all hopelessly naive.
A license stipulates the precise conditions under which you can use a licensed product or service.
It's perfectly legal and to say that Psystar should prove it's not is gibberish.
Licenses regulate the use of many other products and services in all walks of life and serve to protect the rights of the company licensing such products and services.
If you want full rights over a product or service, invent your own, don't go slagging others off for protecting their (not 'there') intellectual property. If those rights were removed as you are advocating, it would be the end of all innovation, R&D and progress, as nobody would have any money to spend on this.
Then again, you actually probably only want Apple's rights removed in your insane hate vendetta. you know, you can always chose 'not' to buy anything Apple or Microsoft or BMW or whatever.
You all sound as if:
a: you haven't got any money, thus are sour that companies charge you what they see fit rather than what you decide is fair
b: your have not completed your most basic education and are probably no older than 14, max 16 (otherwise I cannot for the life of me explain your continued abuse of the words 'there' and 'their' etc)
c: you have completed your education, but are insanely stupid or ignorant or slept all the way through (otherwise, see b)
d: you resent Apple not because you don't like their product but because you have some deep-seated inferiority complex, whatever Apple does, you will always hate it, with it's oh so superior attitude..., makes you feel inadequate deep down...
The only rip-off is when companies decide to charge one price in one location and a different price in another (on a global level) and protect and manipulate markets (DVD's, music downloads etc, car industry, information technology, airlines, luxury goods, pharmaceuticals, etc), if a product is one price in one market, you should be able to get it at that price everywhere.
Everybody goes on here about Apple Fanboys, fact is that nowadays, just about the only positive comments on apple come from Engadget itself, a couple of sensible people and some nutters. about 85% of others bash Apple wherever they can. Probably to do with b and c.
The fact that there is a real question about whether retail versions of OSX are 'full versions' shows that most of you really haven't got a clue about Apple, probably never used a Mac, certainly never owned one. Probably d applies.
Actually, I think Engadget is hurting the osx86 crowd! If they weren't constantly saying this may hurt the osx86 hackers, then Apple probably wouldn't have employed such a strategy. Now they know they can act like they will come after osx86 guys and that will in turn turn the public against Psystar. If Engadget would keep their mouths shut and stop associating Psystar with the osx86 geniuses, then Apple wouldn't have this card to play.
And I am on Psystar and osx86's side. Silly, overpriced Apple hardware. ...hmm, how can I sell this fork for a hundred dollars - ahh, copyright steak and say that you can only eat steak with this fork. Hey, I'm all for the company that develops and provides steak, but if they are going to be lame and say I can only eat their steak with a hundred dollar fork then I say they are the ones that should get sued. Steak for everyone!
As long as Apple doesnt allow clones, the price will be artificially high for the same exact WinTel box AND their market share will continually be lower.
But, wait, I know, "...it..DOESNT MATTER..... We're better than you."
WHATever.
Engadget is against this because psystar is using drivers/the EFI emulator without any permission, nonetheless compensation (which they don't want, anyways.)
some awareness that osx86 is possible is fine, but there is no chance in hell that OSX86 wants this kind of legality based publicity.
Look, we are not pirates. Leopard is only like $130 bucks, which by the way is not an upgrade but the entire operating system. Most of us own a copy of leopard, or at least another legit Mac. so apple is tolerant. They could so easily crush us all, its not funny. There is no verification system in their operating system, they could just force updates, they could cripple their own driver support (which is much more expansive than people realize). With this kind of publicity, stock holders are gonna get worried, and demand apple crush us. Who do you think apple is going to listen to?
Everyone is for apple open licensing their software. Its just not likely guys, apple is a corporation as much as anyone else. They are growing at a tremendous speed even with higher margin computers. Why the hell would they stop now?
First of, Engadget is known to harbor Apple bias.
Apple's EULA is anti-competitive because Apple is locking it's software to it's own brand of computer hardware.
I know what Apple's licensing agreement says but it is illegal (ANTI-TRUST) and it is only still standing because it has not been challenged - until now by Psystar. Unlike Microsoft, which is very big and widespread (market share wise) was quickly attacked for anti-trust. Apple with it's 8-9% market share is ignore... for now.
Apple locks it's OS to Apple brand hardware.
Microsoft locks it's OS to Dell brand only. HP, IBM, Acer, and others are not allowed to use XP/Vista/or Server on their brands because MS' EULA says so.
Get the picture. Oh yeah, dugg by Digg user 'troye.'
@tpadekar
Oddly enough, I was thinking the same exact thing.